linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] x86/platform/UV: Update UV Hubless System Support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d90ffd5c-2e9f-ead2-b866-0af4ab261591@hpe.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:08:54 -0700
From:   Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Dimitri Sivanich <dimitri.sivanich@....com>,
        Russ Anderson <russ.anderson@....com>,
        Hedi Berriche <hedi.berriche@....com>,
        Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] x86/platform/UV: Update UV Hubless System Support



On 9/5/2019 12:02 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Mike,
> 
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2019, Mike Travis wrote:
> 
>> These patches support upcoming UV systems that do not have a UV HUB.
>>
>> 	* Save OEM_ID from ACPI MADT probe
>> 	* Return UV Hubless System Type
>> 	* Add return code to UV BIOS Init function
>> 	* Setup UV functions for Hubless UV Systems
>> 	* Add UV Hubbed/Hubless Proc FS Files
>> 	* Decode UVsystab Info
>> 	* Account for UV Hubless in is_uvX_hub Ops
> 
> Can you please in future mark the next version of a patch or patch series
> with [PATCH V2 n/M] so its clear that this is something different and also
> add a quick summary what changed vs. V1? Adding to each patch which changed
> a short change info _after_ the '---' discard line is also good practice
> and helps reviewers to figure out which part needs to be looked at.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 	tglx
> 

Yeah, I noticed that the V2: tag for the removal that Greg requested was 
missing in the copy sent to me.  Sorry I didn't catch that earlier.

The "[PATCH V2 n/M]" is something I hadn't been aware but I am now.

Should I resend the patches again with those updates?

Thanks.